The Tragic Events in Chile
A Lesson for the Revolutionaries of the Whole World

Article published in the newspaper “Zeri i popullit”

October 2, 1973

In Chile the counter-revolutionary storm continues to rage against the
working masses, the patriots and fighters of that country. The rightist
forces which seized power as a result of the September 11 coup
d’état have established a reign of terror which even the
Hitlerites would have envied. People are being ruthlessly murdered and
massacred everywhere, in the streets or at work, without trial, and on
any pretext. The sports stadiums have been transformed into
concentration camps. Progressive culture is being trampled underfoot.
Marxist books are being burnt in bonfires in the squares, nazi style.
While the democratic parties, trade-unions, and democratic
organizations have been outlawed, mediaeval obscurantism is spreading
over the whole country. The most fanatical, ultra-reactionary forces of
darkness, the agents of American imperialism are strutting on the
political stage. The democratic freedoms which the people had won
through struggle and bloodshed were wiped out within one day.

The events in Chile affect not only the Chilean
people, but all the revolutionary, progressive and peace-loving forces
of the world, therefore, the revolutionaries and the working people not
only of Chile, but also of other countries, ought to draw conclusions
from these events. Of course, we are not talking of an analysis of
purely national details and aspects, or of specific actions,
shortcomings or mistakes of the Chilean revolution, which do not go
beyond the internal framework of this revolution. We are speaking of
those universal laws which no revolution can avoid and which every
revolution is obliged to apply. The problem is to examine and assess in
the light of the events in Chile which views proved correct and which
distorted on the issues of the theory and practice of the revolution,
to verify which theses are revolutionary and which are opportunist, and
to determine which attitudes and actions assist the revolution and
which assist the counter-revolution.

In the first place, it must be said that the period during which the
Allende government remained in power is not a period which can easily
be erased from the life of the Chilean people or from the whole history
of Latin America. Interpreting the demands and wishes of the broadest
popular masses, the Popular Unity government adopted a series of
measures and carried out a number of reforms which were intended to
strengthen the national freedom and independence of the country and the
independent development of its .economy.

This government struck heavy blows at the local oligarchy and the
American monopolies which held all the key positions and were making
the law in the country. The inspirer of this progressive and
anti-imperialist course was President Allende, one of the noblest
figures to emerge from Latin America, an outstanding patriot and
democratic fighter. Under his leadership the Chilean people struggled
for the land reform, struggled for the nationalization of foreign
companies, struggled for the democratization of the life of the country
and for the freedom of Chile from American influence. Allende strongly
supported the anti-imperialist liberation movements in Latin America
and made his country an asylum for all the freedom fighters persecuted
by the thugs and military juntas of Latin America. He gave the peoples’
liberation and anti-imperialist movements his unreserved support and
was in full solidarity with the struggle of the Vietnamese, Cambodian,
Palestinian and other peoples.

Could the big Chilean landowners, who saw their estates distributed to
the poor peasants, forgive him for pursuing this course and this
activity? Could the manufacturers of Santiago, who were expelled from
their nationalized plants, tolerate this? Or the American companies
which lost their power? It was certain that one day they would unite to
overthrow him and regain their lost privileges. Here a natural question
arises: Was Allende aware of the atmosphere which surrounded him, did
he see the conspiracies being hatched up .against him? Of course, he
did. Reaction operated openly. It assassinated cabinet ministers,
functionaries of government parties and rank-and-file officials. It
instigated and directed the organization of the counter-revolutionary
strikes of the truck drivers; merchants, doctors and other
petty-bourgeois strata. Finally it tried its strength in the military
coup in June, which proved abortive. Several plans of the CIA for the
overthrow of the lawful government were discovered.

These attacks by internal and external reaction would have been
sufficient to sound the alarm and make Allende reflect. They would have
been ample reason to implement the great law of every revolution, that
counter-revolutionary violence must be opposed with revolutionary
violence. But President Allende did nothing, made no move. Certainly,
he cannot be accused of lack of ideals. He loved the cause for which he
fought with all his heart and, to the end, he believed in the justice
of that cause. He did not lack personal courage and was ready to make,
and did in fact make, the supreme sacrifice. But his tragedy was that
he believed he could convince the reactionary forces through reason to
give up their activity and relinquish their past positions and
privileges of their own good will.

In Chile it was believed that the relatively old-established democratic
traditions, parliament, the legal activity of political parties, the
existence of a free press, etc., were an insurmountable obstacle to any
reactionary force which might attempt to seize power by violence. The
reality, however, proved the opposite. The coup d’état of the
rightist forces proved that the bourgeoisie will tolerate certain
freedoms just so long as its essential interests are not affected, but
when it sees that these interests are threatened, it is no longer
concerned about ethics.

The revolutionary and progressive forces in Chile have suffered a
defeat. This is very serious, but temporary. A constitutional
government may be overthrown, thousands of people may be killed and
scores of concentration camps set up, but the spirit of freedom, the
people’s spirit of revolt, can be neither killed nor imprisoned. The
people are resisting, and this proves that the working masses are not
reconciled to defeat, that they are determined to draw conclusions from
this and to advance on the revolutionary road. The liberation struggle
against reaction and imperialism has its zigzags, its ups and downs.
There is no doubt that the Chilean people who have given so many proofs
of their lofty patriotism, who have displayed such love for freedom and
justice, and who hate imperialism and reaction so profoundly, will know
how to mobilize their forces and fight the enemies blow for blow to
ensure the final victory for themselves.

For the Chilean people this is a grave, although temporary, misfortune,
but for the modern revisionists it constitutes an all-round defeat, a
complete overturning of their opportunist theories. All the
revisionists, from those of Moscow to those of Italy, France and
elsewhere, presented the “Chilean experience” as a concrete example
which proved their “new theories” about the “peaceful road of the
revolution”, the transition to socialism under the leadership of many
parties, the moderation of the nature of imperialism, the dying out of
the class struggle in the conditions of peaceful coexistence, etc. The
revisionist press made great play with the “Chilean road” in order to
advertise the opportunist theses of the 20th Congress of the CPSU and
the reformist and utopian programs of the Togliattist type.

From the “Chilean experience” the revisionists expected not only
confirmation of their “theories” about “the parliamentary road”, but
also a “classical” example of the building of socialism under the
leadership of a coalition of Marxist and bourgeois parties. They
expected confirmation of their thesis that the transition to socialism
is possible through parliamentary elections and without revolution,
that socialism can be built, not only without smashing the old state
apparatus of the bourgeoisie, but even with its aid, not only without
establishing the revolutionary people’s power, but by negating it.

The theories of “peaceful coexistence” and the “peace.ful parliamentary
road”, propounded by the Soviet revisionists, in the first place, and
by the Italian and French revisionists and their other supporters, are
responsible to a very considerable extent for the spread of pacifist
illusions and opportunist stands towards the bourgeoisie and deviation
from the revolutionary struggle.

All the programmatic documents which the Western revisionist parties
have adopted since the 20th Congress of the CPSU, absolutize the
“parliamentary road” of transition from capitalism to socialism, while
the non-peaceful road is definitely excluded. In practice this has
brought about that these parties have finally renounced the
revolutionary struggle and strive for ordinary reforms of a narrow
economic or administrative character. They have turned into bourgeois
opposition parties and have offered to undertake the administration of
the wealth of the bourgeoisie, just as the old social-democratic
parties have done hitherto.

The Communist Party of Chile, which was one of the main forces of the
Allende government, fervently adhered to the Khrushchevite theses of
“peaceful transition”, both in theory and practice. Following
instructions from Moscow, it claimed that the national bourgeoisie and
imperialism had now been tamed, had become tolerant and reasonable, and
that in the new class conditions, allegedly created by the present-day
world development, they were no longer able to go over to
counter-revolution.

However, as the case of Chile proved once again these and similar
theories make the working masses irresolute and disorientated, weaken
their revolutionary spirit, and keep them immobilized in the face of
the threats of the bourgeoisie, paralyse their capacity and make it
impossible for them to carry out decisive revolutionary actions against
the counter-revolutionary plans and actions of the bourgeoisie.

As the genuine Marxist-Leninist parties had predicted and as time
confirmed, the revisionists were against the revolution and aimed to
turn the Soviet Union, as they did, into a capitalist country, from a
base of the revolution into a base of counter-revolution. They worked
for a very long time to sow confusion in the ranks of the
revolutionaries and undermine the revolution. Everywhere and at every
moment they have acted to extinguish the flames of revolutionary
battles and national liberation struggles. Although for demagogical
purposes they pretend to be for the revolution, with their views and
activities the revisionists try to nip it in the bud or sabotage it
when it bursts out.

Their deviation from Marxism-Leninism, their
abandonment of the class interests of the proletariat, their betrayal
of the cause of national liberation of the peoples, has led the
revisionists to complete denial of the revolution. For them, the theory
and practice of the revolution have been reduced to a few reformist
demands, which can be met within the framework of the capitalist order,
without affecting its basis. The revisionists try to prove that the
dividing line between the revolution and reforms has been wiped out,
that in today’s conditions of world development there is no longer any
need for a revolutionary overthrow, because, they allege, the present
technical-scientific revolution is doing away with the social class
contradictions of bourgeois society, is allegedly a means for the
integration of capitalism into socialism, a means to create a “new
society” of prosperity for all. Thus; according to this confusing
logic, one can no longer speak about exploiters and exploited, hence
according to them, social revolution, the smashing of the bourgeois
state machine and the establishment of the dictatorship of the
proletariat become unnecessary.

Under the mask of Leninism and its creative development the
revisionists aimed at world domination, turning themselves into
social-imperialists. They began with Khrushchevite “peaceful
coexistence”, with “peaceful competition”, with “a world without
weapons and without wars”, with the “parliamentary road”, etc., and
ended up with the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union and the
degeneration of socialism into social-imperialism.

Hence, they were against the revolution and the struggle of the peoples
for liberation, and were against the communist parties which remained
loyal to and defended Marxism-Leninism. In order to achieve their aims,
especially the extinguishing of liberation struggles and revolutionary
movements, the revisionists made the “peaceful road” the foundation of
their “theory”. By revising the fundamental question of Marxism, such
as the theory of revolution, and propagating their opportunist theses,
they wanted to convince the workers to give up their revolutionary
class struggle, to submit to the bourgeoisie and accept capitalist
slavery.

On the other hand, “peaceful coexistence”, which the Soviet leaders
proclaimed as the fundamental line of their foreign policy and which
they wanted to impose on the whole world communist and national
liberation movement, was a complete strategic plan to reach a broad
agreement with imperialism, to strangle the revolutionary movements and
to quell the liberation struggles, to preserve and extend their spheres
of influence. The revisionists wanted to use, and did in fact use, this
kind of “coexistence”, which was entirely suitable to imperialism and
the bourgeoisie, as a great diversion to disarm the masses
ideologically and politically, to blunt their revolutionary vigilance
and immobilize them, to leave them defenceless in face of future
attacks of the imperialists and social-imperialists.

The Soviet revisionists, as well as the other revisionists who managed
to usurp state power, destroyed the party by stripping it of its
revolutionary theory, rejected and trampled underfoot all the Leninist
norms, and paved the way to liberalism and degeneration in the country.
In spreading their anti-Marxist theses that “capitalism is being
integrated into socialism”, that “non proletarian parties, too, can be
the bearers of the ideals of socialism and leaders of the struggle for
socialism”, that “even those countries where the national bourgeoisie
is in power are moving towards socialism”, the revisionists not only
aimed to deny the theory of the vanguard party of the working class,
but also wanted to leave the working class without leadership in the
face of the organized attacks of the bourgeoisie and reaction.

History has proved, and the events in Chile, where it was not yet a
question of socialism but of a democratic regime, again made clear,
that the establishment of socialism through the parliamentary road is
utterly impossible. In the first place, it must be said that up till
now it has never happened that the bourgeoisie has allowed the
communists to win a majority in parliament and form their own
government. Even in the occasional instance where the communists and
their allies have managed to ensure a balance in their favour in
parliament and enter the government; this has not led to any change in
the bourgeois character of the parliament or the government, and their
action has never gone so far as to smash the old state machine and
establish a new one.

In the conditions when the bourgeoisie controls the
bureaucratic-administrative apparatus, securing a “parliamentary
majority” that would change the destiny of the country is not only
impossible but also unreliable. The main parts of the bourgeois state
machine are the political and economic power and the armed forces. As
long as these forces remain intact, i.e., as long as they have not been
dissolved and new forces created in their stead, as long as the old
apparatus of the police, the secret intelligence services, etc.; is
retained, there is no guarantee that a parliament or a democratic
government will be able to last long; Not only the case of Chile, but
many others have proved that the counter-revolutionary coups
d’état have been carried out precisely by the armed forces
commanded by the bourgeoisie.

The Khrushchevite revisionists have deliberately created great
confusion concerning Lenin’s very clear and precise theses on the
participation of communists in the bourgeois parliament and on the
seizure of state power from the bourgeoisie. It is known that Lenin did
not deny the participation of the communists in the bourgeois
parliament at certain moments. But he considered this participation
only as at tribune to defend the interests of the working class, to
expose the bourgeoisie and its state power, to force the bourgeoisie to
take some measure in favour of the working people. At the same time,
however, Lenin warned that, while fighting to make use of parliament in
the interests of the working class, one should guard against the
creation of parliamentary illusions, the fraud of bourgeois
parliamentarianism.

“Participation in the bourgeois parliament,” said Lenin, “is necessary
for the party of the revolutionary proletariat to enlighten the masses,
enlightenment which is achieved through elections and the struggle of
the parties in the parliament. But to limit the class struggle to the
struggle within the parliament, or to consider this struggle as the
ultimate, the decisive form, to which all other forms of struggle are
subordinate, means in fact to go over to the side of the bourgeoisie,
against the proletariat.” V.I. Lenin, Collected Works, vol. 30, pp. 304-305 (Alb. ed.).

Criticizing the “parliamentary cretinism” of the representatives of the
Second International, who turned their parties into electoral parties,
Lenin clearly showed where parliamentarianism leads to in ideology,
policy and practice. He stressed that,

“the proletarian state (the dictatorship of the proletariat) cannot
replace it through its gradual withering away, but as a general rule,
only through violent revolution.” V.I. Lenin, Collected Works, vol. 25, p. 473 (Alb. ed.).

He stressed that

“the need to systematically educate the masses with this idea, and
precisely this idea of violent revolution, is the basis of the entire
doctrine of Marx and Engels.” Ibidem.

By still advocating the “parliamentary road”, the
modern revisionists are simply blindly following the course of Kautsky
and company. But the further they proceed on this course, the more they
expose themselves and the more defeats they suffer. The whole history
of the international communist and worker movement has proved that
violent revolution, the smashing of the bourgeois state machine and the
establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, constitute the
universal law of proletarian revolution.

“The advance, that is, towards communism,” Lenin stressed, “runs
through the dictatorship of the proletariat and it cannot follow any
other course, because there is no other class and no other way to smash
the resistance of the capitalist exploiters.” Ibidem, p. 548.

In the stage off imperialism, both at its commencement and now, too,
the danger of the establishment of a fascist military dictatorship
whenever the capitalist monopolies think that their interests are
threatened always exists. Moreover, it has been proved, especially from
the end of the Second World War to this day, that American imperialism,
British imperialism and others have gone to the assistance of the
bourgeoisie of various countries to eliminate those governments or to
suppress those revolutionary forces which, in one way or another, offer
even the slightest threat to the foundations of the capitalist system.

As long as imperialism exists, there still exists the basis and
possibility for, and its unchangeable policy of, interference in the
internal affairs of other countries, counter-revolutionary plots, the
overthrow of lawful governments, the liquidation of democratic and
progressive forces, and the strangling of the revolution.

It is American imperialism which props up the fascist regimes in Spain
and Portugal, which incites the revival of German fascism and Japanese
militarism, which supports the racist regimes of South Africa and
Rhodesia and keeps up the discrimination against the black people in
its own country. It is American imperialism that helps the reactionary
regimes of South Korea and the Saigon and Pnom Penh puppets, which has
instigated the Zionist aggression and helps Israel to maintain its
occupation of the Arab territories. All the furious winds of
anti-communism, national oppression and capitalist exploitation blow
from the United States of America. Throughout Latin America, with some
rare exceptions, American imperialism has established tyrannical
fascist regimes, which mercilessly suppress and exploit the people. On
that continent, all the weapons used against demonstrations, the
weapons which kill the workers and peasants, are made in the United
States and supplied by it.

The fascist military coup in Chile is not the deed of local reaction
alone, but also of imperialism. For three years on end, during the
whole time President Allende was in power, the Chilean rightist forces
were incited, organized and encouraged in their counter-revolutionary
activity by the United States. Chilean reaction and the American
monopolies took revenge against President Allende for the progressive
and anti-imperialist policy he followed. The undermining activity of
the right-wing parties and all the reactionary forces, their acts of
violence and terror were closely coordinated with the pressures exerted
from outside by the American monopolies, with the economic blockade and
the political struggle the American government waged against Chile.
Behind the military junta was the CIA, the same criminal hand that had
carried out so many coups d’état in Latin America, Indonesia,
Iran, etc. The events in Chile once again revealed the true face of
American imperialism. They proved once more that American imperialism
remains a rabid enemy of all the .peoples, a savage enemy of justice
and progress; of struggles for freedom and independence, of the
revolution and socialism.

But the counter-revolution in Chile is a deed not only of the avowedly
reactionary forces and the American imperialists. The Allende
government was .also sabotaged and savagely opposed by the
Christian-democratic and other factions of the bourgeoisie, so-called
radical democratic forces similar to those together with which the
communist parties of Italy and France claim that they will advance to
socialism through reforms and the peaceful parliamentary road. The Frey
party in, Chile does not bear only “intellectual responsibility”, as
some claim, because it refused to collaborate with the Allende
government, or because it was lacking in loyalty to the legal
government. It bears responsibility also because it used all possible
means .to sabotage the normal activity of the government, because it
united with the forces of the Right to undermine the nationalized
economy and to create confusion in the country, because it perpetrated
a thousand and one acts of subversion. It fought to create that
spiritual and political climate that was the prelude to the
counter-revolution.

The Soviet revisionists, too, were implicated in the events in Chile. A
thousand threads link the Soviet leaders in intrigues and plots with
American imperialism. They did not intend or desire to help the Allende
government when it was in power, because this would have brought them
into conflict and damaged their cordial relations with American
imperialism.

These stands of the Khrushchevite revisionists towards Chile and the
theory of revolution had been confirmed before the Chilean events. They
had been confirmed in the repeated tragic events in Iran: while the
local reaction was killing and imprisoning hundreds and thousands of
communists and progressive revolutionaries, the Soviet revisionists did
not lift a finger, let alone severe diplomatic relations! These stands
were confirmed in the shocking events in Indonesia, where about 500,000
communists and progressives were killed and massacred. Once again the
Soviet revisionists did nothing, took no action and did not consider
withdrawing their embassy from Djakarta.1 These stands of the Soviet
revisionists are not accidental. They testify to the existence of a
secret collaboration with the American Imperialists to sabotage the
revolutionary movements and to put down the peoples’ liberation
struggles.

This stand sheds light on the demagogic character of the much publicized severance of diplomatic relations with Chile now.

Such is the reality. The fine words about their alleged solidarity with
the Chilean people, like all their other demagogic catch-cries, are
simply to deceive public opinion and to conceal their betrayal of the
revolution and the peoples’ liberation movements.

The Soviet government severed diplomatic relations with Chile in order
to exploit the opportunity to pose as a supporter of the victims of
reaction, as if it is on the side of those who struggle for freedom and
independence and the revisionists are defenders of progressive regimes.
The Soviet revisionists help any progressive regime just so long as
this assists their imperialist interests. But they go no further.
Indeed, they are not ashamed to maintain regular diplomatic ties with
such a discredited and bankrupt regime as that of Lon Nol, while they
keep silent about such a great liberation struggle as that of the
Cambodian people.

The events in Chile once again revealed all of the grave tragedy the
peoples of Latin America are experiencing. Likewise, they brought to
light again the shortcomings, limitations and weaknesses of the
revolution on that continent, the very great difficulties and hardships
it is undergoing. But they provide a lesson not only for the
revolutionaries of Latin America. All the revolutionaries of the world,
all those who fight for national and social liberation against
imperialist interference and violence, for democracy and the progress
of mankind should draw lessons from them. This includes the
revolutionaries of the Soviet Union, who must rise against the
revisionist rulers and overthrow them along with all their opportunist
and anti-Leninist theories. Likewise, the revolutionaries of Italy,
France and other developed capitalist countries ought to draw lessons
from the Chilean events, and fight revisionism resolutely, rejecting
the reactionary theories of the “peaceful parliamentary roads” which
the Togliattists and the other revisionists propagate.

We believe that the events in Chile, the fascist attack of reaction
against the democratic victories of the Chilean people, the brutal
interference of American imperialism and its support for the military
junta will encourage all the peoples of the world to be vigilant, to
resolutely reject the demagogic slogans of the imperialists,
revisionists and opportunists of every hue, and mobilize all their
forces in courageous defence of their national freedom and
independence, peace and security.

1 The Soviet revisionists expelled the correspondent of “Harjan
Rakjat”, organ of the CP of Indonesia, from the Soviet Union and
welcomed the visit of Adam Malik, then foreign minister of the
Indonesian fascist regime. They also continued to supply Soviet weapons
to Indonesia.